Nightmare that keeps getting worse - Admiral

Convicted Driver Insurance

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
I have read your posts depressed dad. And to be fair it’s a horrendous situation you are in I can only offer my sympathy and luck that you all get through it ok.

I don’t yet know how much my personal injury claim and final details will come to, I’m prepared for thousands and thousands of pounds. My main worry was get the bill sent to me and have 28 days to pay, take my hone from me, my car etc etc. That’s not the case.

my policy was void after what I’ve done and the lady on the phone who to be fair was blunt but honest about it all.

You are scaring yourself and others if you think they can take your house off you in 28 days. Do some research on the small claims court process. You’ll get plenty of warning about any legal actionThey will need to get a county court judgment against you before they can attempt to legally recover the money and that needs the case to be decided in the county court.

The way they recoup the money needs other legal processes which could end up with a charge on your property if you are a home owner, or bailiffs turning up on your doorstep and probably them seeking evidence whether you can afford to pay or not.

if they start court proceedings you definitely need professional advice.
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Also depressed dad I would like to make a point of the “they don’t fight my corner” admiral are a multi million pound corporation, and like the lady stated to me on the phone “we can’t just roll over and take any figure thrown at us, it puts premiums up for other driver and also the likelihood of recouping several thousand pounds is highly unlikely”
Also do some research on how insurance companies settle claims.
The amount recovered from DD cases is a drop on the ocean compared to non-DD cases. I don’t know the figures but doubt the DD cases make any difference to people’s premiums.

Most insurers don’t get involved in non-fault claims and you end up using claims management companies who charge over the top. Admiral used to make lots of money by referring their own customers to claims management companies for non-fault cases. Who used to pay for that? Thankfully it has been outlawed now I believe.

What about all the non-DD claims? Do you think Admiral do much to reduce the claims? Only the obvious exorbitant ones but they’re the first to say it’s not cost effective to challenge claims.

in my sons case Admiral were lazy and incompetent. Maybe they’ve changed since then but I’d be very surprised if they are fighting your corner.
Have they arranged independent medical examinations?

if you believe they’re doing the best for you then you’re either naive, working for Admiral or just a troll.
 

TCB1989

Well-known member
To be fair to admiral they have been informative and quite transparent up to now which has been quite surprising for me after my insurance got voided my backside fell out so to speak.

Nope no troll or naivety here, just a fool with a DR30!
 

Seve88

New member
Hi Everyone,

Can someone help and advice me further on how i should deal with Admiral. They have caused me so much stress over the last few months and i feel stuck.

Basically, i was convicted of DD back in 2016 and was involved in driving into a parked car. Again Admiral advised me that they will act on my behalf and that i wasn't covered by my policy due to DD. In 2018 they sent a letter to my father as he was the Policyholder and me being a named driver. The letter included the the total bill for damages etc of 13K. I then called Admiral challenging a few things. Firstly, as it was addressed to my farther i told them his unable to pay the amount they asking for due to him being in bad health and registered disabled. Even though i was transparent that i was the one who was involved in the accident and not my father. And that his unable to pay as his only on disability allowance. I also questioned that i hit a stationary parked car and no one was in there but they paid out for personal injuries. I told them to obtain my Police report for that day as i explained that while being interviewed by the police there was no mention of anyone being in the car but Admiral said to me that they are unable to obtain my police report. So without any investigation of the third party they just paid them out and took there word for it. So after that call, they advised me they will look into it and get back to me.

Since my last conversation with them i had not heard anything from them until i received a letter in April 2020 asking for the balance of 13k to be cleared. Again this was addressed to my father. In March 2020 my father passed away. So i called them up and i advised them that my father is unable to pay this debt as his deceased. They advised that i will have to email them his death certificate which i did. Then they got back to me saying that i was the one involved in the accident and that the payment is for me. So i questioned why have you been addressing the correspondence to my father since day one? and why ask for his death certificate? Again they were adamant that i have to pay and then eventually they started asking me to give them a settlement fee as i explained that i cant afford to pay 13k.

My question is can they do this and threaten me with court etc. If i refuse to settle can they take me to court? What's caused me the most pain is why bother asking for my dads death certificate if they knew i was the person in question who was involved in the incident? even after telling them in 2018 and most recently that iv never hidden the fact that i was the one who was driving they still continue to send letters addressed to my father.

Please can anyone advise me further and help in this matter because i feel Admiral are behaving ethnically
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
The policy states

'No cover under the policy will be provided and instead, liability will be restricted to meeting the obligations as required by Road Traffic Law. In those circumstances, we will recover from you or the driver, all sums paid (including all legal costs), whether in settlement or under a Judgement, of any claim arising from the accident.'

First time I've come across a case where they have pursued the policyholder rather than the driver. I thought they couldn't sink any lower.

Bear in mind they have a track record of incompetence (certainly in my son's case).

Short answer is Yes, they could take you to court. I have yet to find a case that Admiral have taken to court. A lot of people have asked for advice on here and many never come back to explain what happened. It's easy to make a claim through the small claims process and I'm surprised they don't pursue it through the courts. Makes me think they don't want the publicity, or they know they can't justify the size of the claim because they don't challenge the third party claims.
Try not to worry about the threats unless they actually start proceedings. Don't ignore any court letters! Seek advice from a solicitor or Citizens Advice if you do.

Admiral have to submit the claim to court within 6 years of the accident. After 6 years the statute of limitation kicks in and they lose the right to make a court claim. You're at least 4 years into the 6 so far.

Did you sign an indemnity form?

Did you claim for damage to your car, if so did they pay up?

Did the 'claim' appear on your father's record, leading to increased premiums? Did he continue with Admiral, or change insurer?

What have they said about the personal injury claim?

I would ask for a full and detailed breakdown of the £13k. Make it clear that you cannot consider settlement without understanding how the costs are made up. Don't make any commitment to pay!

Wait for their response then challenge each item.

Continue to emphasise the distress it caused by them pursuing your father. Make it clear you told them you were the driver and they shouldn't have pursued him. If you have emails or letters as evidence send them to Admiral. If it was by telephone ask for the recording of the call.
If your father had the claim against his insurance record then that's wrong.

Submit an official complaint to Admiral Complaints dept. - Excessive claims with insufficient evidence, spurious (possibly fraudulent) personal injury claim, pursuing your Dad not you. Registering a claim against your Dad (assuming they did). Causing distress asking for death certificate.

Then take it to the financial ombudsman. I succeeded in getting the claim removed from my record. No cover is provided, therefore no claim is made.

Take your time, drag it out as long as you can. Be insistent. The Ombudsman process is slow. Mine took months.
Admiral made several mistakes including breaking the data protection laws. Look out for the mistakes and pull them up on it.

No guarantee they'll back off, or that the case to will time out but it's worth trying.
 

Seve88

New member
Hi Depressed Dad,



Thanks for your response. I will try and answer your questions to the best of my ability.

No. I did not sign an indemnity form? However, only recently because of their constant harassment I felt that I was backed into a corner and said I will pay £8300 as a settlement over a 3 year period as monthly installments. they agreed to that. I told them I wasn’t willing to cover the damages for personal injuries as I have been adamant from the start that no individual was in the car the moment the incident happened. this being said they have sent a letter with the settlement fee and monthly installments which start next month but wasn’t anywhere I had to sign something to return back which I found strange. I have agreed to this by word of mouth but haven’t signed anything that is official. Is it too late to go to the Financial Ombudsman?



My car was a right off so I decided scrap it. But im pretty sure they advised that due to the offense of DD I had to cover it with my own expenses to fix car if I wished.



What have they said about the personal injury claim?

Nothing much other then provided me with a breakdown of total damages which totalled up to 13K. Again they didn’t even investigate the fact if someone was or not in the car at the time of the incident. I told them to refer to the police report as there was no mention of it but they advised that they cant seem to get hold of it. They never explained what they did in terms of investigation to find out if there was someone in car which there wasn’t. The people who claimed as far as I’m concerned submitted a fraudulent claim for injuries.

I still have the letters of demand of payment which are addressed to my Dad. Even though I have committed to settle which was only because I was stressing about the whole situation and the threat of going to court can I still submit an official complaint to Admiral Complaints dept as I have not made any monthly installment payments towards the settlement so far and nothing has been signed?



Hope to hear from you soon



Regards
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Ah, you've agreed to pay. That plays into their hands. They know what you can afford now.
You don't have to disclose any financial information to them unless they've succeeded in a court claim.

However, I can understand why you agreed to pay. It is stressful, compounded by the loss of your father and their threats.

Might make things a little more tricky but I don't see why you couldn't ask for further details and clarity before you commit. You've had time to reflect on it and maybe you agreed under duress or with other things happening in your life that added to the stress.

Complain about the treatment of your Dad and ask for further evidence of the repair costs to the car. Did it include car hire costs for the third party? Usually very high rates and they are only entitled to an equivalent car for no longer than required whilst car is off the road.
Do you think there was £8300 of damage to the other car?

Makes sense that they wouldn't pay out for your car.

You need to gather this information to formulate the complaint. You'll need something concrete to take it to the Ombudsman.

Also important to find out if the claim was reflected in your Dad's insurance record. Did he have his own car? His insurance costs would be higher if the claim counted against him. That's definitely worthy of a complaint if he had to pay extra after the incident.

If you can't drag it out to the 6 year anniversary to avoid paying anything then you might be able to reduce the amount further once you've seen the evidence.
 

price1367

TTC Group
Seve88
There is a simple procedure to be followed by an insurance company to obtain a copy of a police report so I dont know why they re saying the cannot get it.
I would suggest you speak with a solicitor to request a copy of the report for you (it cannot be requested yourself) and this may show that the vehicle was unattended.
The procedure for one force is shown below, together with the costs involved, so look up the details for the police force in the area where the accident happened to get their details.


Admiral go after the person who insured a vehicle and therefore agreed to the terms of the policy, including the clause that says that you will be held liable for damages caused if there is a drink drive repeated offence involved in the collision.
Therefore I think they were right to go after your dad as they did.... Now they are after you as the driver because the policy holder is dead...... they cannot have it both ways in my view. You did not accept, or I expect were even aware, of the clause on drink driving in the insurance policy so I cannot see how they can hold you liable under it. BUT it may be that they can simply sue you as a person who caused damage for which they have been legally obliged to pay out Under the Road Traffic Act.
If you can show that they were reckless in settling a claim without using due diligence for injuries after you pointed out, as a witness to the event, that there was no one in the vehicle at the time And pointed them to where they could obtain evidence to confirm this (in the police report)
So I would use a solicitor to obtain the police report.
Then write to them pointing out what the report shows about the vehicle being unattended (hopefully)
Challenge their costs, because of the injury element
Ask for a breakdown of the claim they paid out for, demanding to see the 3 estimates that they should have asked for and the hire car charges.
get them to confirm in writing that they are claiming their costs as a consequence of the drink drive clause in their insurance policy with the policy holder.
And I am thinking that when you have confirmation for the last bit, you should point out that as you had never seen this clause in the policy as a named driver that the claim should be taken up with the policy holder - your father - now deceased. On request you will be happy to provide them with the executor of your father’s estate for them to lodge a claim with them for when his estate is distributed. Then, if relevant, you can inform them that there was no executor as your father left no estate of any value....
They may come back to you to say that they disagree and that they do feel you are liable as a named driver. You can just say “see you in court because you have no contract with me.”
Or they may come back to you saying that they now hold you liable as a person causing damage that they have had to make good so irrespective of the merits of the drink drive exclusion clause they will take action against you to recover their costs because of your negligence......
You do all these stages with a gap in between each one. Don’t rush into replying, leaving several weeks in between each contact with them.
If you get to the last bit I mentioned when the 6 year period to commence proceedings in civil court are up, uyou just tell them to get stuffed, they are too late.
If you get to the last bit and they still have time to take action, you take the initiative and threaten to make a complaint to the Insurance regulatory body for misrepresenting their claim as being in breach of their insurance clause on drink driving and that they have not done what they should have done by claiming against the policy holder.
That should take you to the 6 year point, where the ‘get stuffed’ comment again beccomes relevand.

Any correspondence from them is a part of the claim process and you can spin them out. Even if they say “if you do not pay we will have no choice but to consider court action etc etc.....BUT if you get correspondence titled “letter before claim” setting out what they want from you that MUST be responded to within 28 days or they WILL take action against you in court without further notice.

Hope these thoughts are useful for you.
 

BigTom

Well-known member
Seve88
There is a simple procedure to be followed by an insurance company to obtain a copy of a police report so I dont know why they re saying the cannot get it.
I would suggest you speak with a solicitor to request a copy of the report for you (it cannot be requested yourself) and this may show that the vehicle was unattended.
The procedure for one force is shown below, together with the costs involved, so look up the details for the police force in the area where the accident happened to get their details.


Admiral go after the person who insured a vehicle and therefore agreed to the terms of the policy, including the clause that says that you will be held liable for damages caused if there is a drink drive repeated offence involved in the collision.
Therefore I think they were right to go after your dad as they did.... Now they are after you as the driver because the policy holder is dead...... they cannot have it both ways in my view. You did not accept, or I expect were even aware, of the clause on drink driving in the insurance policy so I cannot see how they can hold you liable under it. BUT it may be that they can simply sue you as a person who caused damage for which they have been legally obliged to pay out Under the Road Traffic Act.
If you can show that they were reckless in settling a claim without using due diligence for injuries after you pointed out, as a witness to the event, that there was no one in the vehicle at the time And pointed them to where they could obtain evidence to confirm this (in the police report)
So I would use a solicitor to obtain the police report.
Then write to them pointing out what the report shows about the vehicle being unattended (hopefully)
Challenge their costs, because of the injury element
Ask for a breakdown of the claim they paid out for, demanding to see the 3 estimates that they should have asked for and the hire car charges.
get them to confirm in writing that they are claiming their costs as a consequence of the drink drive clause in their insurance policy with the policy holder.
And I am thinking that when you have confirmation for the last bit, you should point out that as you had never seen this clause in the policy as a named driver that the claim should be taken up with the policy holder - your father - now deceased. On request you will be happy to provide them with the executor of your father’s estate for them to lodge a claim with them for when his estate is distributed. Then, if relevant, you can inform them that there was no executor as your father left no estate of any value....
They may come back to you to say that they disagree and that they do feel you are liable as a named driver. You can just say “see you in court because you have no contract with me.”
Or they may come back to you saying that they now hold you liable as a person causing damage that they have had to make good so irrespective of the merits of the drink drive exclusion clause they will take action against you to recover their costs because of your negligence......
You do all these stages with a gap in between each one. Don’t rush into replying, leaving several weeks in between each contact with them.
If you get to the last bit I mentioned when the 6 year period to commence proceedings in civil court are up, uyou just tell them to get stuffed, they are too late.
If you get to the last bit and they still have time to take action, you take the initiative and threaten to make a complaint to the Insurance regulatory body for misrepresenting their claim as being in breach of their insurance clause on drink driving and that they have not done what they should have done by claiming against the policy holder.
That should take you to the 6 year point, where the ‘get stuffed’ comment again beccomes relevand.

Any correspondence from them is a part of the claim process and you can spin them out. Even if they say “if you do not pay we will have no choice but to consider court action etc etc.....BUT if you get correspondence titled “letter before claim” setting out what they want from you that MUST be responded to within 28 days or they WILL take action against you in court without further notice.

Hope these thoughts are useful for you.
Wow Price, you amaze me at times with your knowledge! I know if I ever needed an expert witness for something, you would be top of my list!!!! Brilliant advise😍
 

price1367

TTC Group
Wow Price, you amaze me at times with your knowledge! I know if I ever needed an expert witness for something, you would be top of my list!!!! Brilliant advise😍
I have only been called as an expert witness once since I retired, and I was called for the defence in a drink drive (fail to supply) offence where I justified why the son of a friend of mine had been accused wrongly.
It was an interesting experience having to quote my previous qualifications and experience in drink drive matters so I could give an opinion on what the arresting officers had done. then be cross examined by The Crown Prosecution Service as I as was used to doing it the other way round. When I was asked “Well what would you have done in those circumstances?” I replied “Quite frankly I would have gone to find someone else who NEEDED to be arrested, not this person....” I looked and saw that the magistrates were nodding gently.
He was acquitted.
 

BigTom

Well-known member
I have only been called as an expert witness once since I retired, and I was called for the defence in a drink drive (fail to supply) offence where I justified why the son of a friend of mine had been accused wrongly.
It was an interesting experience having to quote my previous qualifications and experience in drink drive matters so I could give an opinion on what the arresting officers had done. then be cross examined by The Crown Prosecution Service as I as was used to doing it the other way round. When I was asked “Well what would you have done in those circumstances?” I replied “Quite frankly I would have gone to find someone else who NEEDED to be arrested, not this person....” I looked and saw that the magistrates were nodding gently.
He was acquitted.
Poacher turned gamekeeper!!!!:D CPS know what books say, when it comes to the real world though.......

All I know is that you have provided me with invaluable advice, probably the reason I try to help people here with my knowledge and experience! Maybe I need to learn a bit more of your patience though........🤪
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Interesting John (Price1367) that you think a named driver is not aware of the terms and conditions of the policy.

Can a named driver take the car to the Nürburgring, write it off and expect to a full payout because he didn't have a contract?

No doubt named drivers never read the policy document and certainly not accepted the T&Cs. Wonder how that stands in court? Has that ever been tested?

In my son's case 10 years ago there was thankfully never a threat to pursue me as policyholder. Likewise in other cases I've heard about. Maybe him signing the indemnity form made a difference?

Good advice to stretch it out. Less than two years to go so it's feasible.

I wonder if Admiral will claim they have already taken out the PI part of the claim.

The FOS is a bit of a lame duck but do you not think that is a good way to use up time. It would be interesting to test their view on whether a named driver has accepted the T&C's. I have a feeling which way that will go.

Finally, are you aware of any case Admiral have brought to court? Is there a way to find out? I've always been intrigued why they don't appear to take people to court.
 

TPR

Well-known member
Seve88
There is a simple procedure to be followed by an insurance company to obtain a copy of a police report so I dont know why they re saying the cannot get it.
I would suggest you speak with a solicitor to request a copy of the report for you (it cannot be requested yourself) and this may show that the vehicle was unattended.
The procedure for one force is shown below, together with the costs involved, so look up the details for the police force in the area where the accident happened to get their details.


Admiral go after the person who insured a vehicle and therefore agreed to the terms of the policy, including the clause that says that you will be held liable for damages caused if there is a drink drive repeated offence involved in the collision.
Therefore I think they were right to go after your dad as they did.... Now they are after you as the driver because the policy holder is dead...... they cannot have it both ways in my view. You did not accept, or I expect were even aware, of the clause on drink driving in the insurance policy so I cannot see how they can hold you liable under it. BUT it may be that they can simply sue you as a person who caused damage for which they have been legally obliged to pay out Under the Road Traffic Act.
If you can show that they were reckless in settling a claim without using due diligence for injuries after you pointed out, as a witness to the event, that there was no one in the vehicle at the time And pointed them to where they could obtain evidence to confirm this (in the police report)
So I would use a solicitor to obtain the police report.
Then write to them pointing out what the report shows about the vehicle being unattended (hopefully)
Challenge their costs, because of the injury element
Ask for a breakdown of the claim they paid out for, demanding to see the 3 estimates that they should have asked for and the hire car charges.
get them to confirm in writing that they are claiming their costs as a consequence of the drink drive clause in their insurance policy with the policy holder.
And I am thinking that when you have confirmation for the last bit, you should point out that as you had never seen this clause in the policy as a named driver that the claim should be taken up with the policy holder - your father - now deceased. On request you will be happy to provide them with the executor of your father’s estate for them to lodge a claim with them for when his estate is distributed. Then, if relevant, you can inform them that there was no executor as your father left no estate of any value....
They may come back to you to say that they disagree and that they do feel you are liable as a named driver. You can just say “see you in court because you have no contract with me.”
Or they may come back to you saying that they now hold you liable as a person causing damage that they have had to make good so irrespective of the merits of the drink drive exclusion clause they will take action against you to recover their costs because of your negligence......
You do all these stages with a gap in between each one. Don’t rush into replying, leaving several weeks in between each contact with them.
If you get to the last bit I mentioned when the 6 year period to commence proceedings in civil court are up, uyou just tell them to get stuffed, they are too late.
If you get to the last bit and they still have time to take action, you take the initiative and threaten to make a complaint to the Insurance regulatory body for misrepresenting their claim as being in breach of their insurance clause on drink driving and that they have not done what they should have done by claiming against the policy holder.
That should take you to the 6 year point, where the ‘get stuffed’ comment again beccomes relevand.

Any correspondence from them is a part of the claim process and you can spin them out. Even if they say “if you do not pay we will have no choice but to consider court action etc etc.....BUT if you get correspondence titled “letter before claim” setting out what they want from you that MUST be responded to within 28 days or they WILL take action against you in court without further notice.

Hope these thoughts are useful for you.
This, to me, is an example of the strength of support given to this community. Thank you, Price. Many of us use this website as a refuge at our weakest point. It’s people like you that support others, year upon year.
Respect and thanks to you for that.
 

price1367

TTC Group
Depressed Dad,
I take your point, but my argument would be that the contract itself is still with the person taking out the policy. I think in contract law (not my finest area of knowledge) then a company is liable for the actions of their servant, so if there was a breach of the terms of a contract, the company cannot say “I promised to not do this.... but it wasn’t me, it was my engineer who broke the terms...”
Also if sole blame lay with the driver, it would be logical to say that therefore the policy holder (dad in this case) should not lose his no claims, because he himself did not have an accident. Did he lose his no claims? I bet he did (unless protected) because there was a claim made on his policy.


it would be reasonable for a named driver to believe that he had insurance cover, because his name is in the policy. It would not be reasonable for him to have read the whole policy document, just to have seen he was a named driver on the certificate.

It would not be reasonable for him to presume that in the event of a collision where he had been drinking that third party cover necessary in law would be recoverable from him because clause C23 paragraph 27 (for example, don’t look it up!) in this particular policy says so, whereas the majority of policies in the UK do not.
In one of your earlier posts, you quoted what the Admiral policy says: “ No cover under the policy will be provided and instead, liability will be restricted to meeting the obligations as required by Road Traffic Law. In those circumstances, we will recover from you or the driver, all sums paid.......”
So they clearly envisage that they can hold the policy holder responsible for what the driver does, OR the driver if that suits them better. I don’t think they can rely on this. But I agree that they can sue the driver because they caused him to make a loss, in the same way that you could sue a person for hitting you, causing injury... we are all liable for what we do in law. Holding the named driver liable under the POLICY document is another matter. That is why I have suggested keeping it on (their) topic of a breach of the ‘agreed’ policy document for as long as possible, then throwing in the argument about non relevance later to further drag things out.

I do recollect a person on a drink drive course telling me that Admiral were after him for costs for an accident where his son was the named driver and had an accident. He was awaiting the full amount. On the last day he said he had received the full claim .. for almost £200,000 ! He told them he had not for that amount of money, he would have to sell his house to raise rhat amount. They said “OK...”

I am not aware of Admiral actually going to court to pursue a case, but as you say it would be difficult to find this for sure.
 
Last edited:

Seve88

New member
Thanks everyone. The advice provided has been helpful. The accident occurred in April 2016 (16 mths to go ) So I will try to drag this on until the 6 years are up. Quick question though. If I decided to pay the first installment of 230.87 and continued to pay until April 2022. Which will total up to 2700 and then stopped paying the installments once its been 6 years. Can they pursue this through a different avenue or wont they have a leg to stand on? Or shal I just not pay that first installment and drag this on?
 

price1367

TTC Group
I dont think you should start to pay then stop, that might give them a fresh 6 years to take action for default on an agreed debt.....
Just start off by saying you have taken advice and you insist on a breakdown of the expenditure they claim to have incurred and what they did to mitigate them, then continue one question At. A. Time........
 
  • Like
Reactions: TPR

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Depressed Dad,
I take your point, but my argument would be that the contract itself is still with the person taking out the policy. I think in contract law (not my finest area of knowledge) then a company is liable for the actions of their servant, so if there was a breach of the terms of a contract, the company cannot say “I promised to not do this.... but it wasn’t me, it was my engineer who broke the terms...”
Also if sole blame lay with the driver, it would be logical to say that therefore the policy holder (dad in this case) should not lose his no claims, because he himself did not have an accident. Did he lose his no claims? I bet he did (unless protected) because there was a claim made on his policy.


it would be reasonable for a named driver to believe that he had insurance cover, because his name is in the policy. It would not be reasonable for him to have read the whole policy document, just to have seen he was a named driver on the certificate.

It would not be reasonable for him to presume that in the event of a collision where he had been drinking that third party cover necessary in law would be recoverable from him because clause C23 paragraph 27 (for example, don’t look it up!) in this particular policy says so, whereas the majority of policies in the UK do not.
In one of your earlier posts, you quoted what the Admiral policy says: “ No cover under the policy will be provided and instead, liability will be restricted to meeting the obligations as required by Road Traffic Law. In those circumstances, we will recover from you or the driver, all sums paid.......”
So they clearly envisage that they can hold the policy holder responsible for what the driver does, OR the driver if that suits them better. I don’t think they can rely on this. But I agree that they can sue the driver because they caused him to make a loss, in the same way that you could sue a person for hitting you, causing injury... we are all liable for what we do in law. Holding the named driver liable under the POLICY document is another matter. That is why I have suggested keeping it on (their) topic of a breach of the ‘agreed’ policy document for as long as possible, then throwing in the argument about non relevance later to further drag things out.

I do recollect a person on a drink drive course telling me that Admiral were after him for costs for an accident where his son was the named driver and had an accident. He was awaiting the full amount. On the last day he said he had received the full claim .. for almost £200,000 ! He told them he had not for that amount of money, he would have to sell his house to raise rhat amount. They said “OK...”

I am not aware of Admiral actually going to court to pursue a case, but as you say it would be difficult to find this for sure.

I think it's an avenue worth pursuing. It didn't cross my mind during my son's case (I didn't want them coming after me) but I see the logic in Seve88's case and would love to see it tested.

My son was a named driver. I was the policyholder. They did record the 'claim' against my record and I successfully had that removed after the FOS partially upheld my complaint. I argued that they say no claim is made under the policy because no cover is provided for DD, only RTA cover for third party claims.

Therefore a precedent exists where any policyholder can have the 'claim' scrubbed from CUE (if a named driver had a DD accident) and no need to declare on future insurance applications, they can't have it both ways. They can cite my case.

I also argued that the T&C's are unfair to the FCA and the FOS - exposing the policyholder and named driver to unlimited liability, your £200k story being a case in point. That fell on deaf ears and both organisations say the terms are fair.
 

price1367

TTC Group
DepressedDad, dmiral may well have a case, which is why I am advocating timing it out rather then pushing for court! But equally if Admiral went to court and lost it would be awkward for them going forward.
That is why I think they will rely on pressure to make people cave in and hope that the fear of court keeps people paying up.
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Thanks everyone. The advice provided has been helpful. The accident occurred in April 2016 (16 mths to go ) So I will try to drag this on until the 6 years are up. Quick question though. If I decided to pay the first installment of 230.87 and continued to pay until April 2022. Which will total up to 2700 and then stopped paying the installments once its been 6 years. Can they pursue this through a different avenue or wont they have a leg to stand on? Or shal I just not pay that first installment and drag this on?

I wouldn't start paying until you've exhausted all the challenges and dragged it out as far as you can.
I'm guessing you would reset the clock if you agreed to repay then stopped. These sort of questions should be put to a qualified legal adviser. Contract law is a minefield.
 

BigTom

Well-known member
I seem to recall that in contract law there has to be offer and acceptance. I would have thought that by making a payment, you are accepting the contract and therefore if you do not make further payments you are in breach of the contract, which they can then chase up. Not making the first payment (in my opinion) means no acceptance and no contract has been entered into, therefore it doesn't matter what was agreed, the contract was never put in place.... Nearly 30 years since I did any contract law though so may be wrong!
 
Enter code DRINKDRIVING10 during checkout for 10% off
Top